Another Amazing Coincidence Related To The Wtc, By Kevin Ryan Options

[rob balsamo]

Kevin Ryan does an excellent job here connecting the dots.

There appears to be a remarkable correlation between the floors upgraded for fireproofing in the WTC towers, in the years preceding 9/11/01, and the floors of impact, fire and failure. The fireproofing upgrades would have allowed for shutdown of the affected floors, and the exposure of the floor assemblies and the columns for a significant period of time. Exactly what work was done during that time?

In some sections of the NIST WTC report, the exact floors upgraded are listed. Other sections of the report suggest even more floors were upgraded, a total of 18 floors in WTC 1 and 13 floors in WTC 2, but the additional floors involved are not specified.[1]

(click picture for larger size)
(IMG:http://www.911blogger.com/files/Correlation2-thumb.jpg)

Full Article

The pentagon strike just "happened" to be in a reinforced section, and now we find out the same for WTC on both towers. 3 for 3. Geee, what are the odds?

[georgie101]

What an unbelievably strange coincidence!
You couldn't make it up....

[SPreston]

WTC1
Upgraded 92 to 100 + 102
Impact 93 to 99
Major Fires 93 to 99 + 104
Failure 92 to 100
Correlation Chart of WTC Towers

This relationship is unmistakable for WTC 1. Some investigators have pointed out that a number of floors failed simultaneously in this tower, in accordion-like fashion, before the rest of the building began to 'collapse'. These floors seem to match up almost exactly with the floors that were upgraded.

Two blueprints for the 1999, 2000 construction upgrades to WTC 2, provided by a supporter, indicated that the work was done at almost exactly the point of impact and failure in that tower. That is, the southeast quadrant of WTC 2 was the focus of the work, at least on the 78th floor (the blueprints provided were for floors 77 and 78 only). It was the southeast quadrant of WTC 2, at and just above floor 78, where flight 175 hit.
Another amazing coincidence related to the WTC

Extraordinary evidence supporting the INSIDE JOB demolition of the WTC Towers (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/salute.gif)

[Note: I will be speaking with Kevin Ryan, a leading expert on the NIST cover-up, at the Peoria Public Library at 2 pm this Saturday, 10/20/07, 107 N.E. Monroe St., Peoria, IL 61602]

In an amazing about-face, the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) has implicitly admitted that its 10,000-page report on the destruction of the Twin Towers is a fraud, and that the buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition.

In its recent reply to family members Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, scientists Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan, architect Richard Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, NIST states: "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

Thus NIST euphemistically admits that its 10,000-page report on the Towers does not even pretend to provide any explanation whatsoever for the Towers' total collapse--and that indeed no such explanation is possible without invoking the politically-incorrect idea of controlled demolition.
http://911blogger-bans-truth.com/node/12027

[jo56]

Very interesting! Good find!

[rossgs]

To the last poster re the NIST report. You should know that the NIST investigation only went up to the collapse initiation point. The statement you read needs to be understood in that context. They were not tasked with anything beyond that - just how did it get to the point of collapse.

The question of why the global collapse is outside the scope of the report. I don't feel like quoting, but the report says that once the collapse began it was inevitable that it would continue quickly to the ground. There's also a discussion of this point in an NIST FAQ which you can easily google.

I understand that you might want to understand the actual collapse, but that's really an engineering simulation problem beyond what anyone is capable of. That's why people continue to write articles claiming it must have been helped along and articles saying it didn't need any help. If only we could build another WTC and take off the top we might learn more (just kidding).

[SPreston]

Yes I know. The collapse initiation was contrived by means of controlled demolition which NIST, FEMA, Popular Mechanics, the Bush Regime, the prostitute Mainstream Media, and all the other DENIAL mechanisms continue to vehemently disclaim. Regardless, their incessant lies are continually being exposed.

[rossgs]

"In its recent reply to family members Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, scientists Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan, architect Richard Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, NIST states: "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

This is taken out of context. If you include the full text you'll find, as I said, that the NIST's point is that their investigation stops at the point the collapse starts. As they state in the report, that's what they were asked to do, and whether you agree with the official explanation of the subsequent events or not, it's not logical to ask them to draw conclusions on other related topics.

I think that we can agree that we suffer in this country from a really bad bunch of people in the executive branch. The NIST, however, did its job and the poster is being selective in both quotation and exposition of his/her knowledge of the report.

[KP50]

"In its recent reply to family members Bill Doyle and Bob McIlvaine, scientists Steven Jones and Kevin Ryan, architect Richard Gage and the group Scholars for 9/11 Truth and Justice, NIST states: "We are unable to provide a full explanation of the total collapse."

This is taken out of context. If you include the full text you'll find, as I said, that the NIST's point is that their investigation stops at the point the collapse starts. As they state in the report, that's what they were asked to do, and whether you agree with the official explanation of the subsequent events or not, it's not logical to ask them to draw conclusions on other related topics.

I think that we can agree that we suffer in this country from a really bad bunch of people in the executive branch. The NIST, however, did its job and the poster is being selective in both quotation and exposition of his/her knowledge of the report.

Yes I agree, this has been knocking around for a while and NIST are always very careful to point out exactly what their remit was.

The question could be "Whose job was it to determine whether there were explosives of any type planted in the towers and what steps did they take to determine this fact". This seems a pertinent question, given the general belief at the end of the day of 9/11 that explosives had brought down the towers.

[rossgs]

I'm good with that.

My own view is that since so many people are asking this question and since they are tax payers, it would seem possible to get answers. I think where this position gets into trouble is that there is no way to create an actual mathematical or engineering model of the WTC towers and then play with the forces which might have been involved so we can get a recreation.

This is true for several reasons.

The first is the complexity of doing the calculations on a computer, gathering actual data, etc.. In all the papers I've looked at the math is very simplified even if it involves the integral calculus as compared to the actual event. Two papers I've read one by Bazant and one by Greg Urich have awfully simplified models for the events for just this reason.

The other way to do it is to create a scale model of WTC and figure out some way to mimic the forces on it directly. This is very tricky to do because things don't scale linearly. So, you can't have, say, 110 floors 1 inch apart and "cut one out" because there's no where near that correct gravitational energy involved. So, you'd have to make the steel and concrete much much weaker.

We can't use any real forensic techniques at this late date. We don't really have samples you can trust and we don't have any video which shows what's inside that smoke and debris and concrete getting pulverized. What did the fire actually burn? How much oxygen was actually available?

I'm not an engineer just to be clear, but I've been involved from time to time with creating models and I know it gets really complex really fast. So, I'm afraid that even calling for a "reinvestigation" and getting one will fall short of assuaging the concerns of those who think there were "explosives" in the buildings (or cutter charges).

[tumetuestumefais...]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4826764420417612701

video clearly shows a many floors high plume of white smoke going from the base of the South tower. Which supports the assumption the tower was brought down by large amounts of the thermite (or nanothermate) in the basement of the building, which cut the core, and then the huge weight of it transfered via hat truss to perimeter initiated the collapse exactly in the zone damaged by the impact and subsequent fires. This was never discussed in the NIST 10k pages reports.

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Jan 9 2008, 05:02 PM

[KP50]

I first saw this film a couple of weeks ago and have been trying to find out more about it - without success.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCAoJuDw2Ic

Watch it 2 or 3 times from 0:20 to 0:27. I have no idea where it has come from or if it is genuine. Anyone know any more?

[rossgs]

You must have sent the wrong video as there isnt "a many floors high plume of white smoke going from the base of the South tower". There is certainly a huge amount of smoke coming off the building. If you're responding to my no video evidence point, note that it's modified by the phrase "inside" the collapse. After a couple of seconds video taken from outside the towers at NTSC standard resolution doesn't give anyone anything to go on. Again, if I missed something in the video, let me know. I viewed it twice before responding. In the usual CD videos I've seen the bottom is blown out and there a huge noise, I can't see that initiation sequence here.

[tumetuestumefais...]

I first saw this film a couple of weeks ago and have been trying to find out more about it - without success.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCAoJuDw2Ic

Watch it 2 or 3 times from 0:20 to 0:27. I have no idea where it has come from or if it is genuine. Anyone know any more?

I'm bit sceptical, but something like that can be seen also on Aman Zafar photos:

http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-11_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-13_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-16_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-20.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-24_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-25_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-26_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-29_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-30_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-33_1_small.jpg

especially this one:
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-32_1_small.jpg

Full resolution pictures here: http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/

I've asked the Youtube poster where did he came to the video and if he knows something about source - so we can see whther he replies and what.

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Jan 9 2008, 10:17 PM

[tumetuestumefais...]

You must have sent the wrong video as there isnt "a many floors high plume of white smoke going from the base of the South tower".

I checked the video I've posted and it is the right one. You need maybe an ocularist?
The huge plume at the base of the South tower occurs at 00:07 of the video and then in the replay again at 00:14, 00:18, 00:23. The plume is almost so high as the WTC3 and one can see it on the right side and being blown that direction by the wind.

This post has been edited by tumetuestumefaisdubien: Jan 9 2008, 11:00 PM

[KP50]

I first saw this film a couple of weeks ago and have been trying to find out more about it - without success.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cCAoJuDw2Ic

Watch it 2 or 3 times from 0:20 to 0:27. I have no idea where it has come from or if it is genuine. Anyone know any more?

I'm bit sceptical, but something like that can be seen also on Aman Zafar photos:

http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-11_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-13_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-16_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-20.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-24_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-25_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-26_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-29_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-30_1_small.jpg
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-33_1_small.jpg

especially this one:
http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/wtc-32_1_small.jpg

Full resolution pictures here: http://www.amanzafar.com/WTC/

I've asked the Youtube poster where did he came to the video and if he knows something about source - so we can see whther he replies and what.

Great spot! I know those photos from looking at what looks like a fire in WTC7 prior to a tower collapse.

Interesting that the areas of the North tower where wisps of smoke are seen correspond to the strengthened parts indicated by the band.

OK now to do more digging.

By the way the person who put that clip online borrowed it from here.

http://it.youtube.com/watch?v=vXVlc9fh7Wo

[SPreston]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4826764420417612701

video clearly shows a many floors high plume of white smoke going from the base of the South tower. Which supports the assumption the tower was brought down by large amounts of the thermite (or nanothermate) in the basement of the building, which cut the core, and then the  huge  weight of it transfered via hat truss to perimeter initiated the collapse exactly in the zone damaged by the impact and subsequent fires. This was never  discussed in the NIST 10k pages reports.

It is very visible if you pause the video at 00:12 and looks to be about 40 stories tall.

[dMz]

The pentagon strike just "happened" to be in a reinforced section, and now we find out the same for WTC on both towers. 3 for 3. Geee, what are the odds?

Does "reinforced" involve an oxy-acetylene or a Brown's Gas steel cutting torch in matters of Pentagon and WTC1/2 " 're'-construction?" (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/whistle.gif)

[paranoia]

(IMG:http://www.hybrideb.com/images/newyork/plume.jpg)

regarding smoke plumes at the base of the wtc's, has anyone seen the above pic? any thoughts or insights?

[tumetuestumefais...]

regarding smoke plumes at the base of the wtc's, has anyone seen the above pic? any thoughts or insights?

good find paranoia. It definitely looks like a huge smoke plume there.

[Philadelphia]

The video does not 'clearly show' a many floors high plume of white smoke going from the base of the South tower. Nor does it support the assumption the tower was brought down by large amounts of the thermite (or nanothermate) in the basement of the building, which cut the core, and then the huge weight of it transfered via hat truss to perimeter initiated the collapse exactly in the zone damaged by the impact and subsequent fires.

What it does show is large amounts of very light dust being disturbed that was lying on or near the ground.

This post has been edited by Philadelphia: Jan 15 2008, 01:57 PM